Gun Rights Advocates on Edge as Connecticut Confiscation Looms

 (courtesy Americans Against Assault Weapons Ban)

Not for nothing, TTAG warned of bloodshed when Connecticut legislators first mooted the post-Newtown gun control legislation that Governor Dannel Malloy eventually signed into law. With the stroke of a pen, Malloy turned tens, if not hundreds of thousands of previously lawful gun owners into felons – unless they registered their “assault rifles” and “high-capacity magazines” with the state, destroyed them or sold them out of state. As Reverend Wright opined in one of his America-last rants, the chickens are coming home to roost. That said, they ain’t home yet. Meanwhile, gun rights advocates are steeling themselves – and their followers – for that fateful day. They’re looking for signs indicating imminence is imminent. And finding them . . .

Here’s a storm cloud courtesy examiner.com:

Ed Jacovino of The Journal Inquirer stated that Michael P. Lawler, a top aide to Gov. Dannel Malloy, contends that the state will punish those who missed the registration deadline whether they intended to or not.

According to Jacovino,

And while the state won’t immediately prosecute those who missed the deadline, it isn’t ignoring that information, either.

The rifle and magazine declarations will be included in information given to police responding to a certain address. “This would be a factor in deciding how to respond to different situations,” Lawlor says.

Read that statement closely. Lawlor is saying that if a citizen calls the police to report a crime in progress, officers will be able to see whether or not the person reporting the crime has registered their assault weapons and high capacity magazines, and will approach the emergency call accordingly.

Mike Vanderboegh picked-up on the quote. The Sipsey Street Irregulars blogger has been turning up the temperature on Connecticut legislators. A blog post on the 25th called “Connecticut Tyrant’s List” published the home addresses of “CT State Senators voting Yes on ‘An Act Concerning Gun Violence Prevention and Children’s Safety, also known as Public Law 13-3 or Connecticut Senate Bill No. 1160,’ 3 April 2013.”

There’s now a Connecticut Gun Rights Rally scheduled for April 5th. It remains to be seen if the State will hold off on confiscation or any other law enforcement efforts until that date, or beyond. And what happens at that rally. As Ralph points out, these sorts of issues are driven by events more than ideas.

The rally could go seriously wrong. Alternately, the next spree killing could be all the excuse The Constitution State needs to begin door-to-door confiscations of known unregistered “assault rifles” or “high capacity magazines” – especially if the killing happens in-state. Or an “emergency call” could trigger a SWAT raid leading to lethal consequences for the homeowner, other innocent life, a beloved pet and/or the cops.

There are a lot of ways this can go very, very wrong. There’s only one way it can go right: the Supreme Court strikes down the laws or the Connecticut legislature repeals them. Neither of these possibilities seems particularly likely.

avatar

About Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the Publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

157 Responses to Gun Rights Advocates on Edge as Connecticut Confiscation Looms

  1. avatarMarcusDFalco says:

    Let’s face it, the unconstitutional anti-AR laws in NY and CT should have been slapped with injunctions by the judiciary already while the lawsuits against them proceed through the system to the SCOTUS.

    Unfortunately, the state and federal judges in the northeast are left-wing activists. Any blood shed in NY or CT over these laws will be on them as much as it is on the legislators that approved the laws and the LEOs that carry them out.

    • avatarjirdesteva says:

      The antis don’t care if the bloodshed comes they want it so they can say they where right about the gun owning public being blood thirsty and crazy. This would give them the WE told you so moment.

    • avatarPhydeaux says:

      Someone should post those judges home addresses.

      • avatarPaulus says:

        Agreed. they are every bit as culpable for letting the law stand as those who passed it. when something goes wrong, the blood will be on their hands as well.

    • avatarJasonM says:

      I think RF should start referring to CT as:
      The “Constitution” State.

    • avatarbob says:

      why is the SCOTUS silent on 2A? What if CT has a 1776 Concord like event? The irony of starting again where the county began to fight back at tyranny.

      The POTIS and CT public officials appear too incompentent to rule pretending to support the constitution of the U.S.

      May cooler heads prevail and unjust unconstitional laws be repealed.

      • avatarAccur81 says:

        I can’t say that I have much trust or respect for SCOTUS. After they bungled Obamacare, they lost much of their alleged legitimacy. SCOTUS is a fickle friend to the 2A, and may be lost completely if Obama appoints a rabidly statist judge. Given Obama’s choice of an extremely anti-2A surgeon general, another SCOTUS appointment would be very destructive.

        Although their may be pockets of resistance in CT, I believe it is far too northeast liberal to mount much resistance against the ridiculous state laws that have been passed. Then again, I could be wrong.

    • avatarjosh says:

      I really doubt anyone is going to do much of anything. For one, Connecticut you were given a deadline. You didn’t follow that deadline now you’re breaking the law. You want to keep your guns? Should of did as you were told. Now deal with the consequences. All these comments of armed resistance. You can’t bloody open fire on the police because you disagree on a law. It’s law now. Nothing you can do about that but suck it up and comply. You really think your going to shoot your way out of it think again. 90% of you forum tough guys have never seen combat in your life. If you think you can take on swat or even military you even crazier than i thought. Your rights have already been lost. Now you want to cry when they want your guns. People getting arrested for protesting or speaking out. TSA at airports. Indefinite detention. NDAA Act. Obama care. You didn’t care then, why do you care now. Civil war? LOL That would involve team work. America is too much of a man eat man country to involve such team work. Patriots… You guys call yourselves patriots. Patriots wouldn’t be online huffing and puffing. Patriots would be out there getting shit done. The bunch of you, a lot of hot air. Big talk on the forums. While you’re out stocking more guns and ammo that in the end you’re just going to lose or die trying to protect. Keep huffing and puffing because i find it quite hilarious how pathetic you so called “patriots” really are.

      • avatarJR says:

        Should have did what you were told, huh? Like a good little serf?

        The law is crap. It’s arbitrary, and therefore unconstitutional. But I don’t expect you to understand that, since you do seem to think that “right and wrong” are determined by the stroke of the pen.

        Aside: Man, we’ve been getting a lot of astroturfers the past few days…

      • avatar2hotel9 says:

        And another America hating sh*tbag toddled in to spew sh*t. Imagine that.

      • avatarjacob hudson says:

        the 2nd amendment is THE LAW… READ IT!!!!!!! DAMN I MEAN READ THE CONSTITUTION!!!! SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!!!!!!!!!!!!!! RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS!!!!!!!!! SO WHEN THE GOVT SAYS YOU ONLY CAN KEEP ONE OF YOUR 2 or 3 children cuz of POPULATION CONTROL GUESSING YOUR GOING TO EITHER “SUFFER THE CONSEQUENCES” OR STAND UP FOR WHAT UR RIGHTS ARE>>> AND YOU ARE JUST ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE LIKE IN 1775 THAT BELIEVED NOTHING WOULD HAPPEN! WELL WAKE UP HISTORY REPEATS IT SELF!!!!!!!

      • avatarjacob hudson says:

        BTW JOSH! im a former ranger. U.S army. 2nd plt. and iv seen combat.. more than there swat and others have seen. btw 86 percent of swat never see combat. Oh and military? you really think the people that hate obama and his admin is really going to fire onto american citizens protecting the constitution that we have Swore under oath to protect? HAHA your delusional.. Obama will be Using the UN and FEMA and well as DHLS.. which are people who NEVER SEE COMBAT. YOU ARE A JOKE MY FRIEND! the people are the militia.. OH and BTW the 1st American revolution were peasants, farmers, gardeners, slaves. And they defeated the British empire.. the largest ever empire. they dominated half the world.. and we took them out. so i think. Militias are stronger than actual armies due to the fact that they are fighting for something…. REMEMBER FEMA, DHLS, AND THE UN! NOT THE AMERICAN MILITARY

  2. avatarshawn l. says:

    This is where it will begin. If blood is shed, Civil War II. I think the politicians think gun owners will bend to their will. It is not going to happen.

    • avatarS.CROCK says:

      i don’t think that civil war 2 will follow after even more tyrannical actions in the unconstitutional state. if there was bloodshed, the media would paint the gun owner as a deranged cop killer. the media would say that the gun owner was a felon in possession of illegal weapons and the police were going to put him to justice. most people (gun owners included) would not think of him as a lawful gun owner defending his property, even if he was… so not enough people would support the “felons” in ct to start a civil war 2.

    • avatarOCD says:

      Unfortunately if bloodshed happens to the point that it spreads to the rest of the country, our enemies will be on us like stink on sh*t. They will take advantage and insert their own people into the different groups fighting. The government we end up with would be much more likely to be far worse then what we have now. History shows this to be true and we have an example of this happening right now. Ukraine, and Syria, although under slightly different circumstances. Also there are many political groups within the US that this has already happened too. That doesn’t mean I think people should not fight for their rights, but they need to have some foresight before acting. This isn’t a game checkers in this fight.

    • avatarHal J. says:

      If blood is shed, Civil War II

      In Civil War I, you had roughly 1 million men willing to take up arms against the Union, in a country (the CSA) with a population of 12 million. That’s 1 in 6 men (1 in 4.5 if you only count white men).

      Should blood be shed in an incident of gun confiscation, how many gun owners in the United States do you seriously think will run out and form and/or join an army (regular or irregular) for the purpose of fighting the United States of America?

      If the number is more than one in a million, I think you’re vastly overestimating it.

      • avatarBrooklyn in da house says:

        100 mil gun owners. Even if .25 % lace up that would be more than enough to do anything they would want. 2 untrained kids armed with handguns and a rice cooker locked down a major American city. 1 bloated cop created chaos for half of California for days. Im not saying any of this is good but im just sayin.

        • avatarHal J. says:

          100 mil gun owners. Even if .25 % lace up that would be more than enough to do anything they would want.

          That’s 250,000 people. You can’t get that many gun owners to peacefully march on Washington, and you think you can form an army with a over a dozen divisions to attack the Federal Government?

        • avatarAlex says:

          1% of gun owners (1 million) fighting back would be enough to get the fire going. We literally have a constitutional right to bear arms. It may not seem likely, but dude – people don’t think they are breaking the law by owning ARs. Also, they are armed!

          Of course there will be bloodshed if the police start raiding homes of people who, to their core, believe that they are not breaking the law and that the police are essentially “attacking” their home without a warrant.

        • It will only work if they are organized.

      • avatar2hotel9 says:

        I am the United States of America. You saying I am going to “run out”, join an army and shoot me?

        • avatarHal J. says:

          There’s a lot of speculation about secession that goes along with fanciful talk of Civil War 2.

      • avatar2hotel9 says:

        I am seceding from nothing. I am the United States of America. Laws passed in direct contradiction to the Constitution of the United States and the States severally are illegal. Any person or group trying to force such laws on Citizens of the United States place themselves in a condition of insurrection against the United States of America and citizens are duly authorized to put down any such insurrectionists by any means at their disposal. Including armed force.

        The ball is currently in the court of the insurrectionists currently infesting of governmental entities. If they truly do not want a civil war all they have to do is shut the f*ck up and walk the f*ck away. Which way you think they are going to jump?

        • avatarHal J. says:

          If they truly do not want a civil war all they have to do is shut the f*ck up and walk the f*ck away. Which way you think they are going to jump?

          What they want is increasing gun control over the next few decades, Concern about a civil war over this issue never even occurs to them, because they (correctly) dismiss the idea out of hand as the absurd notion that it is.

        • avatar2hotel9 says:

          So your thought is people will simply allow themselves to be murdered without fighting back. Interesting. It has worked in the past, could do so again. Hell, their favorite Agrarian Reformer starved 30 odd million people to death, so anything is possible.

        • avatarHal J. says:

          So your thought is people will simply allow themselves to be murdered without fighting back.

          Oh, a few will fight back…but the vast majority will comply rather than put themselves in the position of needing to fight back.

          Waco didn’t start a civil war. Nor did did Ruby Ridge. And neither will CT gun confiscation.

        • avatarAlex says:

          Even if a few die fighting for the cause, that will be enough to enrage everyone else. Only one AR owning citizen needs to die, because the moment it happens everyone one else has a REASON to fight back. In that senerio, the police would literally be killing citizens who are standing up for their constitutional rights.

        • avatar2hotel9 says:

          I don’t discriminate, I’ll be in with my AK, M1 and SMLE. Not wanting it, I have seen the end results of government suppressing the rights of the people. Hell, fresh new examples in Ukraine. People don’t want Russia’s sh*t, Putin is doing it anyway and it will devolve into roundups and executions, not to mention looting and rape.

      • avatarSteve Ramsey says:

        Ever hear of 4th Generation Warfare?

        • avatarHal J. says:

          Sure…and I remain skeptical that massive numbers of gun owners will engage in it rather than submit to increasing regulation (or even confiscation) of firearms.

      • avatarBrooklyn in da house says:

        I know what the number is. You think that small percentage of gun owners would not fight for their human rights?

        • avatarHal J. says:

          You’re asserting that a quarter million US gunowners will use lethal force and put their lives (and those of their families as well) at extreme risk to resist gun control?

          Color me skeptical.

        • avatarJoe says:

          HJ , are you a prog troll ? What do you think will happen, after the 4th, 5th or 10th gun owner is killed on the expected gun raids ?

        • avatardrav says:

          Out of probably 100 million gun owners only a few million have even bothered joining the NRA. I don’t really seeing many fighting for their RKBA.
          some will certainly. not enough to do anything meaningful though I don’t think.
          when it actually comes to possibly putting their life on the line the very very large majority will hand over their guns

    • avatarDB says:

      Intramural stuff is not where the civil war starts. It starts after pretty much everybody takes advantage of our federalist system and “self selects” by moving to gun-friendly states. Connecticut can and will do what it wants, I don’t think anybody has been under any delusions about what the political culture in CT and many other northeast states is. It’s tyrannical lefties all the way down the line. They don’t care about your damn freedom and your damn rights. Many have realized this and moved away. Many more will.

      The civil war comes when the Feds go after the guns in gun-friendly territory. I doubt CTers will rise up against the CT law enforcement apparatus, but am 100% sure that, say for example, that Oklahomans will rise up against federal law enforcement. That is your civil war spark, right there.

      • avatarJim says:

        Federal law enforcement pretty much includes all law enforcement these days. Homeland Security has infused local police with training and equipment and put in place a rapid response system that is designed to bypass local legislatures and administrators “for the sake of safety and security.” Basically in the event of a major emergency the local cops will be taking orders from the Homeland Security not Local governors and mayors.

    • avatarMina says:

      The Liberals have been creeping ever closer to finally crossing the line between keeping the rabble relatively in line vs inflaming the rabble into action.

      They might not even realize the line is there. But they will as soon as they cross it.

  3. avatarTommy Knocker says:

    Call me paranoid. But I read something else into the official statement. Not that the KNOWN owners of AWs will be passed to responders but that implied is they KNOW who HAS NOT registered their weapons. That this info will go to responders.

    • avatarBayou Boy says:

      That’s how I read it too. If it’s not registered how do they know who has them. But, but they promised they would never use background checks as a gun registry for confiscation.

      • avatarjirdesteva says:

        They (You Know Who They Are) LIED !!!!!! But, I’m sure WE are all shocked that they would LIE repeatedly about registration, surveillance or anything. What’s that old joke about knowing when politicians are lying????

      • avatarWDW says:

        Connecticut has required citizens to submit a form to the state when purchasing a firearm on top of their federal background check. There are some strict rules saying Feds aren’t allowed (supposedly) to keep much information about your purchase. Connecticut has been making no such promise.

        http://www.ctguntalk.com/smf/index.php?topic=18072.0

        http://www.ct.gov/despp/lib/despp/slfu/firearms/dps-3-c.pdf

        Everyone should consider the implications of these forms when you dismiss and downplay the determination of CT residents to keep their firearms. The state officials in CT have a much better idea of who has rifles that the law made illegal than most states do, yet the vast majority of CT firearms owners chose not to register.

        • avatarAnon in CT says:

          Yup – not sure how long that rule has been around, but if you purchased a gun retail and had a DPS-3 filed, then your gun is ALREADY registered with the state and your town. So the new law is “double registration for black guns”. Candidly, I registered because everything I own has a DPS-3, so I it was just a matter of time before they began doing database comparisons to see who had so-called “AWs” who hadn’t double-registered. I hope that they folks who didn’t register are those whose guns pre-date the DPS-3s.

    • avatarDerryM says:

      The State of CT sent letters to the arms owners whose “applications” to register affected weapons and magazines were denied because they missed the “deadline” for submitting said “applications”. So, it would follow they have a list of those persons not related to any background checks. (They have stated they will follow-up on the letters.). I believe the source for this information would be that list and you are correct in understanding the stated intent is to notify LEO’s responding to a reported crime that the person making the report is, or is at the address of, a person who is on that list and has failed to comply with the letter previously sent…aka a felon. This is why they say they would “adjust” the nature of the “response” to account for there being “illegal” weapons and magazines at the location requesting LEO assistance. Plainly put, if you have got one of those letters and have not done one of the things required by the letter, you best think twice about calling for Law Enforcement Assistance if you get victimized by an “ordinary” crime.

      • avatarJus Bill says:

        And if this is truly the case, then the “amnesty” is a total farce, intended to build a name and address list.

        • avatarDerryM says:

          I don’t know if the “deadline” date of January 1. 2014, was an Amnesty date, or not. It was my understanding this was the original date specified in the Law for applying to register your affected arm and/or magazine. It does not seem CT is planning any amnesty date, yet.
          The list was built off the list of letters they sent to those being denied registration because their application mailing was postmarked after January 1, 2014.

  4. avatarRKBA says:

    Civil War 2.0 indeed.

    It all begins in 5… 4… 3… 2…

    • avatarHal J. says:

      Please let us know when to expect the attack on Fort Sumter.

      • avatarS.Dogood says:

        hal you have gone full retard never go full retard

        • avatarHal J. says:

          And people who think that a civil war is just around the corner haven’t gone “full retard”, as you so charmingly put it?

        • avatarbob says:

          wwi started with a pistol.
          the south thought the civil war or war of northern aggression would be over in a few weeks.
          vietnam was suppose to only receive u.s. advisors to the arvin.
          we are still in iraq (20 years now)
          we are still in afganistan (12 years)
          the point is events are not predictable and do not play out as planned without unintended consequences.

  5. avatarDave Calhoun says:

    Is it just me, or does Lawlor’s comment sound quite like he’s just declared a huge portion of the Connecticut citizenry outlaw?

  6. avatarFortWorthColtGuy says:

    One side will blink. It saddens me to say, but personally think it will be the gun owners. They have more to lose. The politicians are insulated from this on three fronts.

    1. Physically – they are not the ones knocking on the doors to confiscate.
    2. Legally – The courts have not struck it down.
    3. Emotionally – in their minds they did the “right thing”. Even if hundreds die and thousands of families are destroyed by members becoming felons, it was all worth it to advance the democrat/authoritarian agenda.

    • avatarEvan in Dallas says:

      A few won’t blink though, and police and citizenry will end up dead. It will make LE think twice about whether they really want to enforce these laws.

      • avatarJus Bill says:

        It will make LE think twice about whether they really want to enforce these laws.
        I seriously doubt that, and I also I doubt that they will hesitate to use all their HSLD “tacticool operator” toyz from DHS.

      • avatarMark N. says:

        Think twice? Ask yourself–what happens when someone kills a cop? We all know the answer to that, and the Dorner case is just the most recent example. Cops are a brotherhood–a gang if you will–and they will attack with extreme prejudice anyone who threatens a member. Killing a cop will draw a full on SWAT attack with fully automatic weapons, no knock raids in the middle of the night, and a lot of people dead who happened to be holding firearms when their doors were busted down. Believe it.

        • avatarBryan says:

          No one should kill a LEO. Nor should any LEO try to enforce any law they know to be unconstitutional just because they were so ordered. The Nuremberg trials proved that. As did the Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse scandal more recently in the US. In the United States Uniform Code of Military Justice, it was deemed,

          “The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.”

          So the “just following orders” argument doesn’t hold up. While the examples were of atrocities that occurred, LEO’s et al, blindly following unconstitutional laws will create an environment for atrocities to occur by Patriots defending the Constitution of the US.

          Dorner was a LEO himself before being terminated and therefore your example is really more like Blue on Blue crime. He wasn’t attacking American gun owners, and the American public wasn’t involved other than to try and stay out of the way. Actually he(Dorner), on several occasions went out of his way to not harm the citizenry. As opposed to the LEO’s who shot up citizens delivering newspapers, and after over a 100 rounds into a 4×2 tin can the LEO’s still didn’t kill either of the 2 occupants, only hitting 1 of them! Maybe they don’t need automatic weapons either?

          But yes LE is a gang and yes they will go ape sh*t nuts. But isn’t that what we’re supposing gun owners would also do? I live in the land of the douche bag politician, yes Sacramento, and as such I suspect that we are a fair representation of metro. police demographics. City budgets all across this country are being trimmed to the bone, and the local LEO’s are always taking a hit. The consensus seems to be buy more toys and limit the number of boots. There are more gun owners on just my street alone than there are LEO’s on duty in my whole city! Roll the toys down the wrong street and the toys would then belong to the neighborhood, including all that precious SWAT gear. The problem with LE’s vs. Dorner is that it was a manhunt, not LEO’s (or govt.) against the American people. Some LEO’s are good constitution abiding individuals and will turn to do what is right. Others will not and in the end they just won’t have the numbers.

          Of course the media can spin a few isolated cases. But when the frequency has escalated enough, and when whole neighborhoods are under fire, you can’t spin that. The whole country will know and at that point the S will have really hit the fan.

        • avatarMack Bolan says:

          You can bet that plenty of people will shoot a cop, and in many cases that shooting is justified. Should things go south in CT, the cops are enemy combatants in the event they act outside the constitution.

  7. avatarPete says:

    I don’t see it as a second Civil War as much as a second Revolution. Politicians have been pushing the people for years and perhaps it is time the people push back. It can be a peaceful or bloody revolution, depending on how it plays out, but the bloodshed will be on the politicians and bureaucrats hands.

    • avatarSammy says:

      Bingo! And the politicos send their brainwashed goons to do the dirty work, just to claim their hands are clean.

  8. avatarTominator says:

    If they can do it in Connecticut and get away with confiscation, you can bet an attempt will be made on the federal level…..maybe not tomorrow….but coming none the less…

    • avatarEvan in Dallas says:

      They can try, but the local law enforcement has to want to comply. In the Northeast you are generally SOL, in Texas or other states that don’t particularly care for the Feds, it will be unenforceable.

  9. avatarMichael Laney says:

    If the “gun control BS” isn’t stopped in it’s tacks in Connecticut, it won’t be stopped anywhere! The preverbal crap is about to hit the fan, folks!

  10. avatarH.R. says:

    The firearms declaration forms in CT are already outdated. What if people claim to have decided to follow the law and sold their rifles and accessories out of state? It’s going to be hard for the state to disprove that.

    • avatarSammy says:

      Yea, but the powers that shouldn’t be will turn you house into sticks looking for the guns you claim to have sold whether you did or not.

      • avatarihatetrees says:

        I’m thinking that CT may have a problem getting warrants to toss thousands of homes because the residents didn’t fill out a form. Or am I missing something here?

  11. avatarHegemon says:

    I live in a state south of the Mason-Dixon line. But, due to familial commitments I visit or drive through certain NE states about every other year. Without fail I get pulled over by the police, mainly state entities, and questioned about firearms in my vehicle. Not being an idiot, I usually SANITIZE my car regarding all things RKBA, no ammo, no holsters, etc., before I start my trip. Yet, these clowns insist on partially violating 4/5 amendments with questioning and attempted searches. I am not a person to bash the police, yet, the police in the NE relish in their roles of “illegal” firearm enforcement. It’s a very strange situation where liberals, who usually despise and abhor the thin blue line, give them a lot of leeway and encouragement when it comes to the state sanctioned harassment of law-abiding gun owners. This may not end well…

    • avatarS.CROCK says:

      why are you pulled over without fail?

      • avatarRockOnHellChild says:

        “You ain’t from around here, are yah, boy?”

        That’s why ^

      • avatarDrewN says:

        Cops don’t routinely pull over out of state plates where you live? My old roomie got pulled over constantly here in SoCal for NY plates. And she was a cute white girl driving a new Accord. I also had a friend come down from Wa and she was stopped twice in Oregon and once in Ca, all three times looking for weed. And she’s literally a little old lady.

    • avatarJus Bill says:

      It’s a very strange situation where liberals, who usually despise and abhor the thin blue line, give them a lot of leeway and encouragement when it comes to the state sanctioned harassment of law-abiding gun owners.

      They love it, unless they’re on the receiving end. Then it’s invariably harassment, police brutality and/or civil rights violations. “Law for thee, not for me.”

  12. avatarTom W. says:

    I remember the Boston citizenry applauding the tacticool vehicles and the military er uh police after they raided and evacuated multiple homeowners in search of the two marathon bombers.

    The New England area has brought this on itself, as patriots and conservative types have become the minority. We’ll see how far the .gov wants to shove the citizens that are giving them the one finger salute. The .gov better remember that we can shove back too.
    What did King Leonidus tell the Persians?

    • avatarRalph says:

      What did King Leonidus tell the Persians?

      I think he told them to fvck off. But it sounds more eloquent in Greek.

      • avatarKCK says:

        I believe he said,
        “NUTS”

        Or something like that.

        • avatarRalph says:

          When you mix up Leonidas with Gen. Anthony McAuliffe, you get something like “Come and get our nuts.”

          Which is something I personally would not encourage a Persian or German to do.

  13. avatarJavier says:

    Ladies and gentlemen, the constitution state!

  14. avatarRandy Drescher says:

    This is political theater. They will probably do a few raids, get a few cops killed & tell everyone they need to be sure & vote, to stop crazy gun owners. I think obamacare o has dug himself a pretty big hole to climb out of though.

    • avatarEric says:

      Randy is abut right. It’s political theater, and they have done the calculus. They see it as a win on the propaganda front. Justifies later actions.

      To those foreseeing a civil war, what do you think the police militarization is all about?
      The combination of information and tanks means no possibility of any such thing. It will be presented as a part of the “war on terror” (thanks, W, you moron)

      The only real puzzle to me is the cooperation of virtually all of law enforcement. I suppose that since such a high percentage of our cops are ex military, the habit of following orders trumps thinking. that and a carve out. Must be nice.

      • avatarSammy says:

        Heads up for an other Gleiwitz incident.

      • avatarJus Bill says:

        Don’t forget that thanks to the NSA, CIA, FBI, and other three-letter agencies every phone call and email has a stored record, and your cell phone is constantly telling all and sundry exactly where you are. And if needed, the camera and mic can be turned on to listen in. Or be tapped in any number of “legal” ways. All this info is being neatly packaged in the State Fusion Centers (in some cases [NY, SF, LA, Houston] CITY Fusion Centers) for use by the local po-po.

        YOUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK.

  15. avatarAnmut says:

    Robert, how about an on-going photo post of people from the rest of the republic posting photos like the one on this thread?

  16. avatarDon says:

    This means that in the next election these voters will be fighting for their lives and their freedom. I doubt the other side will be as motivated.

    • avatarRambeast says:

      Another possibility, the newly minted felons are quietly collected at the polls while trying to vote out the legislators that incriminated them.

  17. avatarmurray says:

    always envied you your constitution and the protection it gave you from Government, not much point in you having one is there

  18. avatarjoe says:

    Let’s see-citizen who has never committed a crime legally buys a rifle with a 30 round magazine.Scumbag gun grabber Malloy and his anti freedom minions decide citizen is a felon if he doesn’t register his legally purchased firearm/magazine.Down the road citizen calls in to police that his car has been vandalized-police respond with a SWAT team and a firefight ensues.How does the media get to spin that,especially if it happens to more than one person?The reason I mentioned car vandalism is that it isn’t the kind of call where police should be going in ready to rumble as opposed,say to a call that the citizen is threatening and/or shooting at neighbors with a firearm,which would be a legit reason for a SWAT response.

  19. avatarCA.Ben says:

    What about ever other state with assault rifle registries? How long after the first bloodshed in Connecticut will they wait to begin confiscation?

    • avatar2hotel9 says:

      Which states are those?

      • avatarJus Bill says:

        CA, NY, NJ, MA, and MD to name just a few.

        • avatar2hotel9 says:

          I know people in all those states, and to the best of my knowledge they don’t have their weapons registered, with the exception of the ones who are cops or work/carry in Federal buildings. Cities, counties? I know a bunch of them try this sh*t, not sure just how successful they are at it. Bet good money they have a tiny fraction of 1% of the weapons in their areas registered.

          Governmental type a$$wipes always think they can force their anti-American sh*t down people’s throats, and while they are busy doing it to 1 the other 1 million simply ignore them. That is the point we are at. Americans have taken to ignoring government by the millions. THAT is why all this crap is being pushed. Leftards really hate being ignored. They REALLY hate being laughed. Time for Americans to start laughing in their faces and telling them to f**k off. Push them right over the edge, make them go through with their threats.

      • avatarCA.Ben says:

        California politicians introduced legislation last session to confiscate all registered assault weapons. It was pulled by the author, but it will be back.

        Gun owners shooting up government agents in Connecticut is all the excuse that our lunatics need to go full retard on our gun rights.

        • avatar2hotel9 says:

          Is there registration in Cali? I keep hearing about it being discussed in their legislature, never heard if it ever passed. Can’t think of any others.

        • avatarMark N. says:

          RI am no expert in this area, but my understanding is that when the original assault weapons ban was passed, owners were allowed to keep their firearms if they were registered. Then there was a period where a lot of AR and AKs were sold afterwards that complied with the new law, and those were not registered, rather the transaction was recorded at the FFL doing the transfer. (All firearms transfers in the State, even private transfers, are required to be processed by an FFL.) Then, effective on and after January 1, 2014, all long guns sold are registered with the California DOJ–just as handguns have for many years. That is the current status. There is now pending a bill sponsored by Senator Kevin Deleon, discussed previously on this forum, that would require the registration of all “ghost guns”–which as far as we can tell, applies only to homebuilt ARs or AKs (e.g., ARs built with 80% lowers) that have not been processed through an FFL (and usually have no serial numbers either), and also appears to be retroactive. Not that ANYONE in California has ever built a rifle from an 80% lower–but since they are invisible ghost guns, I guess we can never be sure. (Cue creepy Halloween music.)

        • avatarMarcus Aurelius says:

          Hotel: yes. Handguns have been registered at purchase for a while and new long guns need to be registered starting back in this jan.

        • avatar2hotel9 says:

          Knew about handgun registration(sales record is registration so it is just duplicating effort) did not know it extended to longarms. Like I said, have heard talk of it over the years and knew about restrictions on what can be sold in Cali. Time to give that state and enema, then move on to the NE states.

  20. avatarMaineuh says:

    This is a situation where we need to win more hearts and minds; to demonstrate to the oblivious that gun owners are not the bad guys. Blogs like this one definitely help but the people we need to inform don’t come here. We need to have more voices in the mainstream. And I don’t mean Ted Nugent.

  21. avatarRalph says:

    It seems to me that CT is going to handle this the way states handled seat belt violations.

    When states first enacted seat belt laws, cops didn’t stop drivers just to ticket them for a seat belt violation. If the cops made a stop for any other reason such as speeding, they’d cite the driver for the seat belt too.

    Once they had us conditioned, they started to make stops for nothing but the seat belt.

    Boiling the frog. It doesn’t actually work on frogs, but it’s very effective on sheep.

  22. avatarPhil says:

    Nearly all sheriffs in NY and Colorado are openly refusing to enforce their new gun laws. Sucks to live in CT or other similar slave states. Might b time to move.

    And, in Connecticut, there are about 9000 LEOs and hundreds of thousands of “illegal” ARs and magazines. You do the math.

  23. avatarST says:

    Look at the bigger picture for a moment.

    Why did the sheeple nationally ignore Obama’s foolish quest for more Federal regulation? Because even the moronic sheeple know the difference between a crazed shooter and a law abiding gun owner.

    Now we have Conneticutt. A state where possession of my own puny collection of two handguns would be a crime.IMO, what the other side actually wants IS a violent shootout.

    As soon as a man somewhere on the East Coast decides to go King Leonidas when the government illegally demands his property , CNN ,Fox News, and every left wing blog on the planet will pick up the story. And instead of castigating the government, thell make the citizen look like Ted Kaczynski.

    “GUN oWnEr ShOoTs FIvE COps!”

    “White House Issues Response to East Coast violence”

    Next thing that happens are Federal “emergency decrees” initiating a nationwide 10 round mag limit and other EOs to “defuse the crisis.” Temporary, of course….until Hillary takes up the mantle after Obama and renews the restrictions, or cons Congress into making the restrictions law .

    Sure, most of the laws will be unenforceable nationwide….but that logistical fact didn’t stop Malloy or Cuomo. It won’t stop Obama .

  24. avatarMaineuh says:

    I just picked up a Mossberg 590. I think the relevance to this story is clear. Okay, there is no relevance. I just wanted to get that out there.

    • avatarSixpack70 says:

      There is a 590 I’ve been eyeing for a few weeks. Too bad I already blew my gun budget for the next few months. It’s priced well below MSRP.

      • avatarMaineuh says:

        I hear ya. I bought this one off a buddy whose thinning his arsenal just a smidge. He gave me a good price on it, but the most accommodating part of the arrangement is that I can pay it over time. Really great shotgun. So solid and so many options with it.

  25. avatarArdent says:

    There are still many ways off this path for both sides, but if no one blinks the stage is set for some very bad things to come down. Even as it is the faith of the people in their elected representatives and those these have appointed to enforce the laws is seriously shaken. I can feel the tension all the way to Ohio.

    Let’s hope the would be tyrants in CT realize their overstepping mistake before it’s too late.

  26. avatarAdub says:

    Hey, if a few thousand people rioting in the streets can drive the leader of Ukraine out of office, maybe the people of CT can do the same?

    And if Russian troops can “liberate” Crimea, maybe the Texas National Guard can “liberate” Connecticut?

    • avatarRandy Drescher says:

      Yes, I think the 3 percenters can do a fine number on CT all by themselves. Think Dorner times 3,000.

    • avatarRalph says:

      And if Russian troops can “liberate” Crimea, maybe the Texas National Guard can “liberate” Connecticut?

      Maybe they should liberate Austin first. And by “they,” I mean the TNG, not the Russians.

      • avatarAdub says:

        The people of Austin will self-deport once Texas cuts off all soy milk and sushi imports from The People’s Glorious Republic of Mexi-California.

    • avatarJus Bill says:

      The only way there will be rioting in the streets is if the SNAP cards aren’t refilled on time. Gotta have them beers and smokes.

    • avatarSantander says:

      Stage a demonstration. A coordinated state-wide demonstration. A State wide flash-mob. We have the technology.

      Count the number of law enforcement officers in each City and town in Connecticut (they go by towns and cities not by counties, which are formalities). These numbers are in their budgets– public record.

      At each and every town hall and city hall muster enough people to outnumber the sworn and armed LE personnel by at least three to one. Hand out cardboard cutouts of AR’s — and only cardboard cut outs. Carry signs — “Don’t make us come back for real.” And words to that effect.

      March around the town hall or City hall — and then disperse. NO speeches. NO shouting. NO chanting. Complete silence if possible… Don’t worry about it being a secret — they will not be able to be everywhere in countervailing force all at once– which is precisely the point.

      Do this in each and every town on the same day and hour.

      THEN start a recall petition.

  27. avatarDermott says:

    Don’t put any money on the police and/or military not firing on civilians nor on a slow calculated process to work in Connecticut.
    Some of you don’t remember Kent State (National Guard) nor the 70,000 plus warrant less searches conducted EVERY YEAR in this country.
    The police are already being acclimatized to just showing up and shooting without justification.
    Just sayin’

  28. avatar2hotel9 says:

    What is the total population of CT? What % of them are cops of some flavor? Now, CT government is claiming several hundred thousand citizens are now felons. Do the math, and don’t leave out criminals. They have nothing to gain from siding with government and everything to gain by siding with their fellow, armed, citizens.

    The unarmed CT “citizens” are the ones stuck in the middle. And they are the ones cops and “politicians” will punish first, make them even more frightened and cowed, then start telling them it can all go away, all they have to do is snitch on family and friends and all their “sins” will be forgiven.

    Don’t laugh. This is a tried and true and very successful method used for a very long time in Europe/Russia.

  29. avatarChuckN says:

    I think a rally, particularly a large one (i.e.over 100,000)
    would actually be a good thing. CT et al have been
    edging quietly towards confiscation. If there is a large
    rally where something happens, the cat’s out of the bag.
    A rally may force an open confrontation and every anti,
    including the press, will have a hard time spinning the
    debacle without further escalating tensions and risking
    warfare.

    On a further note, should a large rally take place, I would
    fully expect the CTNG called. This would only serve to
    harden the resolve of those who who view the CT
    government as a tyranny. Unfortunately, by continuing to
    act as unbending overseers rather than elected
    representatives, the holes these politicians have dug are
    going to be 6 feet deep for many of the electorate rather
    than a ruined political career.

    • avatarRalph says:

      The only way you can get 10,000 people in CT to have a rally is to hold it at a Mercedes Benz dealership.

  30. avatarDerryM says:

    In the recent article “CT POLICE READY TO GO DOOR TO DOOR”, I commented that the State of CT would not launch a planned campaign to seize “illegal” weapons and magazines and arrest their owners (made felons by law/fiat), but employ other means to force compliance and/or confront “violators” piecemeal. So, here is Phase 1.

    Insofar as Civil War 2, that’s not likely because Civil War 1 was an entirely different situation where you had whole States (both populous and political) united in one purpose, with contiguous borders of like-minded States opposing the Federal Government. It’s not like Armies of Arms Owners are going to form in some States, then traverse unsympathetic States to attack Connecticut. It just will not happen, moreover, it really cannot happen. We need to stop wasting time on this “Civil War 2″ notion and start figuring out how we can really help our Brothers and Sisters in Connecticut. I do not see any good options, but I am sure there are sharper tools in the shed who can. It is/will be very complicated.

    • avatarSteve in RI says:

      The reason we have all of this is our own fault. We (not saying us here) get the government we deserve by making choices at the ballot box. The people wanted the first black President – now we are stuck with him because no one will impeach him because he is black, and the race card will be played immediately as the left does all the time. BHO can and will do more unconstitutional things and will get away with it, because no one will impeach the first black POTUS. The next big thing will be the first female POTUS, and 100 years from now there will be the first trans-gendered POTUS. ;-)

      • avatarDerryM says:

        Agreed. Take a look at the Electoral College and how it works and what happened in 2012. IF the Republicans, Libertarians, Tea Party and other Conservatives get control of the Senate in November this year, I predict there will be movement to impeach Obama. It may not get anywhere and will probably come from Tea Party Congressmen (NOT to vilify them, but just forecasting based on their general ideology).

        • avatarHal J. says:

          Impeaching Obama requires a simple majority in the House, but conviction require a two-thirds majority in the Senate. Even in he were to be impeached, the chances of him actually being convicted are nil.

        • avatarDerryM says:

          Yes, I agree there’s little chance of Obama being impeached because all Conservatives can hope for is to gain a simple majority in the Senate in November 2014. The House has not tried it because, as we have seen time and again, anything they send to the Senate that the insane old crotch, Harry Reid, doesn’t like never gets to the Senate Floor. Reid needs to go before anything worthwhile can get done by Congress. As far as I am concerned the last two years of Obama’s Presidency would be better spent by Congress in other pursuits than wasted trying to Impeach a President who already will be remembered as one of the worst in history.

  31. avatarKCK says:

    And while the state won’t immediately prosecute those who missed the deadline, it isn’t ignoring that information, either.
    Any law that is not prosecuted immediately, either is with out a victim or an instrument of arbitrary enforcement.
    A crime that a policeman can watch and not make an arrest is one of my tests for a bad law.

  32. avatarcubby123 says:

    Show them what youre made of Conneticut! Don’t back down to these ahole liberal beauracrats . Stash you guns , don’ t play their game, tell them you sold or gave them away.Better to fight another day.Keep Your Firearms, Til this is rectified by the supreme court. LET THE LAWSUITS BEGIN!

  33. avatarZebulon Pike says:

    The new era of liberal power is one of selective enforcement. The idea is to enact huge, sweeping laws that are unenforceable at any consistent scale. Then, enforce them as needed by politicians to assert their power or show “they are doing something” right around re/election time. If there is an uproar, bend the law as needed (temporary delay, application extension, etc) to show the people that they are “listening” and then ride out the storm until the uproar will inevitably die down. Then begin the selective enforcement again as political needs warrant.

    This is what happened with Obamacare and Obama’s treatment of dozens of other federal laws. I predict the AR registry law in CT will be used the same way–to win hearts and minds of ignorant voters by showing “action to make you safer/richer/healthier” and then to punish political enemies.

  34. avatarBluesMike says:

    Here are a few thoughts. The suggestions for rallies worry me. It would be easy for a liberal operative to slip among the crowd and just shoot a revolver in the air. This would cause Kent State times 1,000. And yes, I remember Kent State. Different time, different president, and different media. Now the media would say the gun owners rallying shot at police and they had to be “put down.” Too many still believe the media tells the truth. So, I’m definitely thinking the rally is not the way to go.

    If it were possible (and I’m not sure it is), all the formerly law-abiding gun owners should get together and enlist help from outside the state to move their newly-illegal weapons and magazines outside the state. I truly believe you could find enough honest, helpful people (gun owners tend to be honest and helpful in my experience) that would temporarily hold these rifles and magazine, even up to a few years, and then give them back when the courts have gotten rid of this stupid law, and hopefully, the voters come to their senses and get rid of the tyrants. I’m reminded of those satellite pictures of the huge convoys of Russian military vehicles moving the weapons of mass destruction from Iraq to Syria over several weeks time so that the media could make fun of the president for the “weapons of mass destruction” thing. I then remember when the pictures were extremely efficiently erased from the internet (well, except for browser caches). It seems like Connecticut gun owners could arrange similar convoys for their suddenly dangerous weapons of mass destruction. The key to this strategy is that they would become “legal” again in the faulty logic of the tyrants. Now what do the tyrants do?

    Think about this. If 99% of those guns moved out of the state for the next year or so, any action by the tyrants is likely to backfire on them. I’m not naive. I suppose the LEOs could carry around a bunch of “drop-ARs” so they could provide “evidence.” The thing is, after that, it would cast a lot of suspicion if the gun owners could then provide receipts showing that the AR they owned was a completely different model.

    Overall, even if imperfect, this tactic would likely be the hardest for the tyrants to deal with.

    Mike

    • avatarBluesMike says:

      (Darn. I replied (to myself) and forgot to copy/paste and of course my reply was lost again. This time it got a 502 proxy error. Oh well, I’ll try to remember all that I wrote and type it in again.)

      While I still like the idea of moving the rifles and magazines out of state to friends, there are other options that are variations on this theme. The confiscation letters mention rendering the rifle or magazine inoperable or selling to an FFL.

      Suppose I take the bolt out of the rifle and send it out of state. The rifle is now inoperable. Get the state police to say that is enough and there are lots of options. One that stuck out to me is that the companies that make these great rifles could get together and provide a service where if you pay postage both ways, they would receive and hold your bolt and then send it back to you at a later time, once the constitution-violating laws are repealed. This would be a way for these companies to really support their customers and be great advertising for them. There might be something in the contract where the bolt becomes theirs if you don’t request it back after a very long time (5 to 10 years). This could also work for the magazine springs (and followers if needed).

      Another thought is the FFL idea. Suppose I worked up a contract with my FFL where I sold it to them for $1 up front and an agreed-on balloon payment after some number of years. In the meantime, you could request your rifle, pay the $1 plus some small processing fee and get it back. If the law holds for, say 5 years, the FFL would pay me the balloon payment and they would keep the rifle.

      After thinking about it, I like the option where we send parts out of state (just enough to make it legal) and have some way to get them back once we’ve brought the constitution back.

      Mike

      • avatarUS says:

        I think by “render inoperable” they mean “render permanently inoperable.” So just removing the bolt wouldn’t be enough.

        • avatarBluesMike says:

          So, what exactly is the definition of permanently inoperable?

        • avatarUS says:

          Changes to the firearm that prevent it from functioning and are for all practical purposes irreversible. E.g. like welding the chamber closed.

  35. avatarMack Bolan says:

    Meanwhile in CT recyclers are wondering why glass bottles are increasingly absent from the collections and retailers don’t understand the run on 2 gallon gas cans.

  36. avatarWI Patriot says:

    There is a storm looming on the horizon…

  37. avatarWilliam Burke says:

    Is anyone else having problems connecting to TTAG links this afternoon? About 90+% are timing out for me. I’ve restarted and restarted (and zapped my PRAM repeatedly)… I’ve had lots of problems of OSX Maveriks, but the recent update seemed to fix a lot of them.

    They are just timing out without connection, most of them. So thanks for cutting out a lot of my TTAG time, then! ;D

  38. avatarTom W. says:

    Hmmm…. Having some Warsaw Ghetto and Col. Jeff Cooper moments, those along with our Founding Father’s, they leave little doubt on which side of those that which to “play” with tyranny, and a resistance that pretty much says FOAD.

    For those who have forgotten. A rag tag bunch of civilians, in Warsaw during WWII, caused havoc against the Nazi’s for months with second hand guns and ammo. Yes they were finally overrun, but like the brave 300, they are remembered for standing against tyrants. Few stood against many. And simply said “That’s Enough”. The Progressive’s cave when you throw it back at them in their (insert expletive) face…Pray for no bloodshed, but remember, it will be “they” who fire first…Kick in my door, and you will be treated as such….
    A Home Invader. Law of Unintended Consequences Applies.

    What are you doing about it? Waiting? Or Acting To DO Something?

  39. avatarHenry Bowman says:

    its funny they worry about semi auto`s all the time,

    A Mosin Nagent with cheap optics can drop a LEO/SWAT team member, or a Big Dumb Congress Critter from 1000 yards no problem, out sight, and lots of time and distance to beat feet and get out of dodge..

    There are about what 5 to 7 million Nagents, not to mention Remington, Savages, Single and Multi shot .50 BMG uppers that are bought with no paperwork, or whole Semi Auto .50s built at home with not a damn bit of paperwork..

    Think of 3 to 10 Ex-Marines(once a marines always a Marine) Sharp Shooters with some Semi Auto .50 Cal rifles with some Homemade suppressors( In for the penny in for the pound, After the first one the rest are free, thumbs up if you know the the sources) maybe one or two “Tracking Point” rifles some thermal optics, a police scanner and other toys…

    Think they cant shit on the Statist parade?

    Think they cant make the “elected official” regret ever being elected?

    Think they cant make the police so demoralized, so terrified , so unwilling to enforce any law that violated the Constitution, they wont even show up to work….

    That is just one squad, one city….

    Can any one think what will happen with 14,000,000 vets, just a hand full of from Spec Ops/ Company man?

    Factor in small drones, and smart rifles, and a net just bursting with “How To” And “DYI” with all the TOR and Proxy sites, and countless flash drives and deep net sites to hide them, but they will not be alone

    14,000,000 vets,
    70% of the Armed Forces will side with us
    Local LEO will not want to risk life and limb for some elitist
    and lets not forget

    150,00,000 Gun Owners

    They want a war they will get one they cant not imagine…

    We are trying to avoid this, and they are pushing us to the point where we will have no choice to be fight, they are lost on the battlefield of ideas, their lose will be even worse on the battlefield of war..

    What is the opinion of the people who read this post?

    They should Read Enemies Foreign and Domestic by Matthew Bracken

  40. avatarMatt in TX says:

    “a Big Dumb Congress Critter from 1000 yards”

    Thanks to Sipsy Street. There is a list out there of all of the people who voted for this bill. Their names, their addresses, phone numbers etc. The III% can just go and cut off the heads of the hydra.

    http://www.thedailysheeple.com/patriot-activist-makes-his-own-list-the-home-addresses-of-ct-legislators-who-just-voted-in-favor-of-gun-control_022014

  41. avatarDaily Beatings says:

    Those that sent in forms but missed the deadline are going to get a visit from the Connecticut State Police since they are “low hanging fruit”. The resources involved to track down and determine which persons did not register firearms and magazines would be astronomical running into hundreds of millions of dollars.

    Add the cost of arrests, prosecutions and incarcerations that number jumps to hundreds of billions. Include the economic loss by wage earners, increased welfare participation for families affected and future tax revenue by creating a permanent underclass of felons that number jumps to trillions. Connecticut is projected to have over a two billion deficit within the next two years.

    Mass confiscation is not going to happen.

  42. avatarJames Becker says:

    One key point that is often forgotten. We were quite isolated in the 18th and 19th century. On the world stage now, this type of instability within our boarders will encourage our external enemies to act. We have made many enemies and lost quite a few fiends during the wars of the last 12 years. As Ben Franklin said, “United we stand, divided we fall”.

    • avatarOld Ben turning in grave says:

      Your point is valid. However, at the moment, our enemies do pretty much whatever they want, anyway. At least, the USA doesn’t seem to be much of a factor.

  43. “And while the state won’t immediately prosecute those who missed the deadline, it isn’t ignoring that information, either.”

    Politicians are very quick to switch their stances on any subject when their jobs are in danger. I wonder how fast they will switch up their commitment to prosecution once their lives are on the line?

    “The rifle and magazine declarations will be included in information given to police responding to a certain address. “This would be a factor in deciding how to respond to different situations,” Lawlor says.”

    So, in other words…a SWAT team will respond to a house fire at those addresses instead of the fire department.

  44. avatarRDNK TXN says:

    Tryanny has to be stopped,…RIGHT NOW ! IF it has to start in CT. with the gestaopo (under the guise of LE) booting in the doors of law-abidding citizens,who own legal firearms,confiscating these weapons and charging these people with some imaginary felony bullshit,so be it ! I can only speak for myself,but I know Texas is behind you 100% ! 3% is plenty,more than enough !

  45. avatarMike Sorenson says:

    Read the law first, Only a person must register,Citizen, Individual, does not.

  46. avatarTXN RDNK says:

    The gun-grabbing,douche bags in CT operating under the guise of law enforcement are screwed and they f..king know it. The” Connecticut Patriots” will prevail agains’t this tryanny and they know that too ! Unconstitutional laws dont mean shit and are null and void,just like the panty wastes gun-grabbing libturds are.

  47. avatarwb says:

    here is why politicians are no longer afraid of what gunowners may or may not do if confiscation is ordered. the america we once knew is dying. whites no longer have children in enough numbers to sustain the race. the feds have decided it is better to maintain the tax base than pander to whites. by increasing immigration you weaken the conservative base with people from countries used to following orders. they also breed like rabbits so politicians can keep making money. by doing this they also destroy the conservative influence by destroying the middle class. nations without middle classes are always dictatorships. there will soon be only two classes of people, rulers and slaves. dont like it, tough. the american people will soon get one hell of a wake up call as the feds and state govts show them they are no longer free to do or think anything but what the rulers tell you. they also know that only a very small portion of you will fight back so getting rid of those who fail to comply will be as simple as isolating them in the court of public then crushing them in their homes while the media portrays the swat teams as the heroes and the gun owners as a bunch of dangerous racists. if the truth bothers you as you read this just go back to your clicker to watch whatever peice of nonsense you spend your nights on.

  48. avatarIsaac says:

    I have to admit, the guy in the picture isn’t the best representation of gun owners supporting gun rights. The hand tattoo are a bit offsetting. I’m not accusing the guy of being a criminal or felon or anything. For all I know he could be a great guy. But it’s obvious the guy has made some poor decisions in his life.

    Point being, there are plenty of people/pictures that portray gun rights in a good light, this is not one of them.

    Great article though. :)

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.